DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-22 are pending and claims 1-9 are withdrawn.
This action is in response to the amendment filed 10/3/2025.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/3/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21 and 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
As stated in the restriction requirement of 10/29/2024, “the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries)”, here, the species elected requires at least a text search for “crimp” or forms of crimping, staking, swaging, etc, the limitation in claim 1 is much broader and does not require the elected feature for crimping, and therefore, Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required.
Since applicant’s arguments are not persuasive this action is made Final.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3/31/2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention II, species I in the reply filed on 3/31/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that applicant submits that all claims are directed to a vent assembly having a crimp/indentation. This is not found persuasive because claim 1 does not require a crimp/indentation but rather only a reduced diameter.
Applicant further traverses the election of species I, this is not persuasive, since the drawing in Figure 6 shows a single crimp, and the specification further discloses that “a single crimp, two crimps, three crimps, four crimps, or more..” may be used (see para.0031).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/3/2025 was filed prior to the mailing date of this action. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted 10/3/2025 would have been accepted, however, after additional review of the submitted drawings, the numerals 10,18 and 40 are utilized to define the same overall assembly and lower end in each of the embodiments with different configurations.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters “10”, “18” and “40” have been used to designate all the different assemblies for the numeral 10, and both lower ends of different configurations, crimped and not crimped ends for the numerals 18 and 40. These numbers should be redefined as 40, 40’,42” and 18,18’, 18” and 10,10’,10”, as an example.
The drawings therefore revert to the originally filed drawings and the prior objections remain.
The drawings are objected to because; the lines and numbers have poor quality, see 37CFR 1.84. (l) Character of lines, numbers, and letters. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning. (p)(3) Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height. They should not be placed in the drawing so as to interfere with its comprehension. Therefore, they should not cross or mingle with the lines. They should not be placed upon hatched or shaded surfaces. When necessary, such as indicating a surface or cross section, a reference character may be underlined and a blank space may be left in the hatching or shading where the character occurs so that it appears distinct.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "12" and "12" have both been used to designate the body in Figures 1 -5 and 6-10 (reference numerals only designate one part design, the other number should be “12’ “, as an example); reference characters "66" and "62" have both been used to designate the rounded end of the float in figure 9.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The changes to the specification have been entered and overcome the prior objection.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant’s amendments further clarify the structure as discussed in the prior action.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 13, “movable” should be - -movable float - -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "said vent body includes…" in the newly amended limitations. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation “between said movable float structure” which is unclear as to what other structure the ball is located between.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10,11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ozaki (US 6557595).
Regarding claim 10, Ozaki discloses a vent (140), comprising: a vent body manufactured of a single piece of material (col. 6, lns. 65-67), defining an elongate axis and including an aperture (the horizontal opening in 141 c) extending partially through said vent body and positioned perpendicular to said elongate axis, said vent body further including a bore (the hole at 141b) fluidly connected to said aperture,
a hollow cavity (within 141a) and an opening (the hole at 141j) in an end of said vent body positioned opposite said vent body from said aperture, wherein said bore, said hollow cavity and said opening are each positioned along said elongate axis and are fluidly connected with one another, wherein said aperture, said bore, said hollow cavity and said opening define a continuous fluid path through said vent body, and wherein said opening is defined by at least one crimp (at 141j, col. 7, lns 35-38) in a side wall of said vent body; and
a movable float structure (46) positioned within said hollow cavity, said movable float structure manufactured of a material that floats in fuel, wherein said movable float structure seals said bore when said vent body is in a tipped position (projection 46a capable of closing the communication port 141b) and wherein said movable float structure is retained within said hollow cavity by said at least one crimp (two crimps are being shown as present);
wherein said vent body includes a side wall (141a) that defines said hollow cavity, said side wall having a middle region that defines a first wall thickness and a lower region that defines a second wall thickness, said opening and said at least one crimp (“crimp” being labeled as first indented portion below) positioned within said lower region and wherein said second thickness is less than said first thickness (as shown in the amended view below, the second thickness is approximately one half the thickness of the first thickness, see the dimensioned areas below).
PNG
media_image1.png
385
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
199
328
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the second thickness is less than the first thickness
PNG
media_image3.png
624
559
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Ozaki discloses said movable float structure defines a cylindrical tip region (the upper round smaller cylindrical protrusion at 46a) having a seal secured thereon (the seal being the top horizontal surface of 46a).
Regarding claim 13, Ozaki discloses comprising hose attachment structure (141,141c) extending outwardly from said vent body and perpendicular to said elongate axis (as shown in Figure 4).
Regarding claim 14, Ozaki discloses wherein said second thickness is one half of said first thickness (as shown in the amended figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
199
328
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
385
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Ozaki discloses said at least one crimp defines first and second indented portions positioned in said lower region of said side wall (as shown in the amended figure above).
When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP 2125.
Regarding claim 16, Ozaki discloses said at least one crimp defines first and second indented portions positioned in said lower region of said side wall (as shown in the amended figure above for claim 15), and
an innermost edge of each of said first and second indented portions defines a distance therebetween,
wherein said distance is less than a width of said movable structure positioned within said vent body, said distance and said width measured perpendicular to said elongate axis of said vent body (as shown in the amended figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
842
888
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ubaldi (US 4779637). The claims being rejected as best understood based on the 112 rejections.
Regarding claim 17, Ubaldi discloses a vent (V), comprising: a vent stem (11) manufactured of a single, integral, piece of material and having an absence of seams therein (as shown in Figure 2, no seems are shown), said vent stem defining an elongate central axis (the inherent vertical centerline axis through 10,21) and including a first cavity (8) extending partially through said vent stem and positioned perpendicular to said elongate axis (the horizontal section of 8 is perpendicular to the elongate axis),
said vent stem further including a second cavity (the cavity of 11 surrounding 10A) fluidly connected to said first cavity through a borehole (22) and extending along said elongate axis from said first cavity to an end of said vent stem opposite from said first cavity, said end of said vent stem including an indented portion (the groove at 23, the groove being considered as an indented portion, in the broadest reasonable interpretation, one meaning for the term indent is a deep recess or notch on the edge or surface of something);
a movable structure (10,18) positioned within said second cavity, said movable structure manufactured of a material that floats in fuel, wherein said movable structure seals said borehole between said first cavity and said second cavity when said vent stem is in a tipped position (as seen the rounded end of 21 permits alignment/tipping with sealing to the matched angle sealing surface); and wherein said indented portion of said vent stem retains said movable structure within said second cavity of said vent stem (the indented portion having a ring 23 that holds the float assembly in place).
PNG
media_image5.png
422
634
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, Ubaldi discloses (see amended figure below) said vent body includes a side wall that defines said second cavity, said side wall including a middle region and a lower region that includes said end of said vent body, said lower region of said side wall having a wall thickness less than a wall thickness of said side wall in said middle region (the wall thickness at the groove/indentation is less than a thickness in the middle region), said indented portion positioned within said lower region of said side wall.
PNG
media_image6.png
446
665
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Ubaldi discloses a weighted ball (19) positioned within said second cavity between said movable float structure and said indented portion (as shown above), and wherein said indented portion retains said movable float structure and said weighted ball (Col. 3, lns. 21-24, the groove with the ring 23 retains the movable float) within said second cavity of said vent stem .
Regarding claim 19, Ubaldi discloses a wall thickness of said lower region side wall is approximately one half of the thickness of said thickness of said middle region side wall.
PNG
media_image7.png
583
967
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Ubaldi discloses said indented portion includes at least one crimp (23 ring is considered as being a crimp in that it extends inwardly toward the central axis) that extends inwardly toward said central axis of said vent body.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 6557595) in view of Nakamura (US 5082016).
Regarding claim 12, Ozaki discloses all of the features of the claimed invention including said hollow cavity includes a cylindrical region (the vertical necked region of 141 having bore at 141b) that defines a diameter (the inner diameter of 141b) although is silent to having;
a tapered shoulder region and a cup shaped region that defines a diameter less than said diameter of said cylindrical region, wherein said tapered shoulder region tapers inwardly from said cylindrical region to said cup shaped region, and wherein said cup shaped region terminates in said bore and is adapted to receive said seal positioned on said movable structure, said seal sealing said bore when said vent body is in said tipped position.
Nakamura teaches the use of a tapered shoulder region and a cup shaped region that defines a diameter less than said diameter of said cylindrical region, wherein said tapered shoulder region tapers inwardly from said cylindrical region to said cup shaped region, and wherein said cup shaped region terminates in said bore and is adapted to receive said seal positioned on said movable structure, said seal sealing said bore when said vent body is in said tipped position (as shown in the amended figures below, the valve is capable of being tipped while still being sealed as shown in figure 2a where the outer clearance between the float 32 and the inner diameter of the housing permit such movement).
PNG
media_image8.png
622
1482
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
606
858
media_image9.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a sealing mating geometry as taught by Nakamura for the sealing mating geometry in Ozaki to have a tapered shoulder region and a cup shaped region that defines a diameter less than said diameter of said cylindrical region, wherein said tapered shoulder region tapers inwardly from said cylindrical region to said cup shaped region, and wherein said cup shaped region terminates in said bore and is adapted to receive said seal positioned on said movable structure, said seal sealing said bore when said vent body is in said tipped position, since it has been found that, since it has been held that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). The modification would yield the predictable results of sealing the valve opening.
Claims 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 6557595) in view of Boswank et al. (US 3970098). Claim 22 being rejected as best understood.
Regarding claim 21 and 22, Ozaki discloses all of the features of the claimed invention and further including that said at least one crimp prevents said movable float structure from passing through said opening, although is silent to having; in claim 21, a heavy ball positioned within said hollow cavity between said movable float structure and said opening and wherein said at least one crimp prevents said heavy ball from passing through said opening,
And in claim 22, a heavy ball positioned within said hollow cavity between said movable float structure, wherein said at least one crimp defines first and second indented portions positioned in said lower region of said side wall, and wherein said at least one crimp prevents said heavy ball and said movable float structure from passing through said opening.
Boswank et al. teach the use of a heavy ball (46, see Fig. 2-4) positioned within said hollow cavity between said movable float structure (42) and said opening (at 28)
And, a heavy ball (46) positioned within said hollow cavity between said movable float structure (42).
PNG
media_image10.png
1059
815
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a heavy ball as taught by Boswank et al. into Ozaki to have a heavy ball positioned within said hollow cavity between said movable float structure and said opening and wherein said at least one crimp prevents said heavy ball from passing through said opening, and a heavy ball positioned within said hollow cavity between said movable float structure, wherein said at least one crimp defines first and second indented portions positioned in said lower region of said side wall, and wherein said at least one crimp prevents said heavy ball and said movable float structure from passing through said opening, in order to prevent loss of fuel when the vehicle is overturned (Boswank et al., col. 1, lns 36-col.2, lns. 3).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center, for more information about Patent Center and, https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx, for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753